Question
Although a number of excellent studies narrate the development of domestic technology and its impact on housewifery, these works do not discuss the contributions of the women employed by manufacturers and utility companies as product demonstrators and publicists, who initially promoted new and unfamiliar technology to female consumers.
Option A
Option B
Option C
Option D
Option E
(This question is from Official Guide. Therefore, because of copyrights, the complete question cannot be copied here. The question can be accessed at GMAT Club)
Solution
Sentence Analysis
Here’s the sentence structure:
- Although a number of excellent studies narrate (Dependent clause presenting a contrast to the main clause. Subject: a number of excellent studies; Verb: narrate)
- the development of domestic technology (First object of the verb ‘narrate’)
- and its impact on housewifery, (Second object of the verb ‘narrate’)
- these works do not discuss the contributions of the women (Main Clause. Subject: these works; Verb: do not discuss)
- employed (Verb-ed modifier modifying ‘women’)
- by manufacturers and utility companies (prepositional phrase modifying ‘employed’)
- as product demonstrators and publicists, (prepositional phrase modifying ‘employed’)
- who initially promoted new and unfamiliar technology to female consumers. (relative clause modifying ‘product demonstrators and publicists’. Subject: who; Verb: promoted)
- employed (Verb-ed modifier modifying ‘women’)
The sentence says that even though several studies talk about certain things (the development of domestic technology and its impact on housewifery), they do not discuss certain other things (contributions of certain women). Which women? Women employed by manufacturers and utility companies as product demonstrators and publicists.
As is, the sentence looks fine.
Option Analysis
(A) Correct.
(B) Incorrect. For the following reasons:
- ‘employed to be something’ is incorrect idiomatically. ‘employed as something’ is the correct version.
- ‘who’ in the non-underline part cannot refer to ‘product demonstrators and publicists’ because of the presence of the intervening prepositional phrase.
(C) Incorrect. For the following reasons:
- ‘who’ in the non-underlined part cannot refer to ‘manufacturers and utility companies’ since ‘who’ can refer to only humans. Besides, even if ‘who’ could refer to ‘manufacturers and utility companies’, the sentence still wouldn’t make sense since companies didn’t promote new and unfamiliar technology to female customers; women did.
- ‘their’ in ‘their products’ seems to refer to ‘women’ rather than manufacturers and companies since ‘manufacturers and companies’ noun hasn’t even come when the pronoun ‘their’ appears. I consider it a major error.
(D) Incorrect. This option has the same error as 1st error in option B.
Please note that ‘who’ in the non-underline part CAN refer to ‘demonstrators and publicists’ since the intervening prepositional phrase ‘of their products’ modifies the noun ‘demonstrators and publicists’. Since a noun modifier can jump over other noun modifiers, ‘who’ can refer to ‘demonstrators and publicists’. While I do not consider this construction an error, I still find the construction in option A ‘slightly better’.
(E) Incorrect. ‘who’ in the non-underlined part cannot refer to ‘products’ since ‘who’ can refer to only humans. Besides, even if ‘who’ could refer to ‘products’, the sentence still wouldn’t make sense since products didn’t promote new and unfamiliar technology to female customers.
Discover more from GMAT with CJ
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Please could you help me understand why “who” cannot jump over the prepositional phrase to refer to “product demonstrators and publicists”
What do you mean by ” intervening prepositional phrase ” as mentioned in your explanation
What does the prepositional phrase modify in option B? I have used intervening in the literal sense: that comes in between.
I felt “by manufacturers and utility companies” modifies “product demonstrators and publicists” Since it is placed right after it. But now that I read it, I believe the prepositional phrase is actually modifying “employed”
In other words, the structure is “the women employed…. by manufacturers and utility companies”
Hence “who” cannot jump the pp to modify “demonstrators and publicists”
Please correct me if I am wrong
Yes, you are correct now.
Great explanation.
One question: why can’t ‘who’ modify ‘women’?
is it because there is an intervening prepositional phrase ‘by manufacturers and utility companies’ which modifies the action ’employed’ rather than ‘women’.
Are you talking about option (A)? If so here is what I believe…
women (subject) employed (verb-ed modifier modifying women) by manufacturers and utility companies as product demonstrators and publicists (PP modifying “employed”), who (relative pronoun modifying publicists)
Now,
if a noun modifier correctly and logically modifies the previous noun then there is no need to search for another entity that it “should” modify… In this case “women”
Even if,
you wish to say that “who” can refer to women you aren’t entirely wrong (from meaning stand point) Because if you notice it is the “women” who are “demonstrators” and “publicists” Thus if who is referring to “publicists” then meaning wise it is indeed referring to “women” as well
But as I said, grammatically and logically “who” refers to “publicists” hence you do not need to search for another possible entity
In optionD and E, isn’t the precedent of ‘their’ ambiguous. It can refer to both manufactures and publicists.
Please help.
In option E, there is no word ‘publicists’. In option D too, even though ‘publicists’ is also a plural noun that ‘their’ can refer to, we can see that logically ‘their’ should refer to ‘manufacturers’. Since the logical reference is clear, there is no issue even here.
Leave a comment